No USW

[Bomster]

Let's say for some reason or another the German Empire decides against conducting Unrestricted Submarine Warfare in early 1917. Aside from almost certainly butterflying or atleast delaying US entry into the war on the side of the Entente, how does the rest of the war play out without USW or US participation? Would Germany be able to win the war or atleast secure a peace that doesn't destroy them? If Germany doesn't pursue USW (which they hoped could starve the British), what other actions may they take to put the pressure on the Entente?

 

[Monk78]

Let's say for some reason or another the German Empire decides against conducting Unrestricted Submarine Warfare in early 1917. Aside from almost certainly butterflying or atleast delaying US entry into the war on the side of the Entente, how does the rest of the war play out without USW or US participation? Would Germany be able to win the war or atleast secure a peace that doesn't destroy them?

There is no way Germany wins in ww1 , best they can do is conduct a successful defence in the West while defeating russia in the east.

 

[McPherson]

Tanks and airplanes. The French have them and will get more. Germans don't have tanks and little prospect of getting any. and they are running out of airplanes and pilots. 1919 will be ROUGH sledding for the Franco-British, but with a Spartacus Movement on their hands and no food harvest, and the blockade, I see the Germans suing for terms by no later than April 1919 with the Allies on the RHINE.

The Americans don't even have to show up.

 

[Bomster]

@Riain thoughts?

 

[Garrison]

Let's say for some reason or another the German Empire decides against conducting Unrestricted Submarine Warfare in early 1917. Aside from almost certainly butterflying or atleast delaying US entry into the war on the side of the Entente, how does the rest of the war play out without USW or US participation? Would Germany be able to win the war or atleast secure a peace that doesn't destroy them? If Germany doesn't pursue USW (which they hoped could starve the British), what other actions may they take to put the pressure on the Entente?

Sorry but this sort of handwaving is extremely irritating. If you can't come up with a credible reason for Germany to do this why propose it in the first place? USW was Germany's last throw of the dice to try and get the Entente to make peace on terms reasonably favourable to Germany(bearing in mind they couldn't predict the Russian collapse) and they knew the potential consequences and did it anyway, why are they going to change their minds and do nothing while their population suffers increasing hunger that is destabilizing the country?

 

[Bomster]

Sorry but this sort of handwaving is extremely irritating. If you can't come up with a credible reason for Germany to do this why propose it in the first place? USW was Germany's last throw of the dice to try and get the Entente to make peace on terms reasonably favourable to Germany(bearing in mind they couldn't predict the Russian collapse) and they knew the potential consequences and did it anyway, why are they going to change their minds and do nothing while their population suffers increasing hunger that is destabilizing the country?

I thought of a POD, in which Charles Evans Hughes defeats Woodrow Wilson and becomes President. Perhaps this spooks the Germans as Wilson was anti-war and Hughes comes from the same party as the incredibly pro-war and anti-German Theodore Roosevelt.

 

[NoMommsen]

I see the Germans suing for terms by no later than April 1919 with the Allies on the RHINE.

The Americans don't even have to show up.

... and what do you dream of at night ?

Tanks ... . The French have them and will get more.

Build from what steel ?
France had to import up to 3/4 of the steel it used up for its military. Even before the germans cut them of their main source of ore to make steel. ... not to talk about the coke necessary to cook the steel which prewar came mainly from Germany.
During the war France imported even more steel from GB as well as mainly from ... the US of A. ... only that they had to buy on british accounts as Wall Street was somewhat ... reluctant giving France credit. In 1915 they managed to get a 10 million $ credit from First National Bank (?) and Morgans combined and only after much efforts thoughbut having asked for 100 millions ... 0.0 ...
And , btw, the british would also run short on credit - as discussed at this board numerous times - what won't leave them broke but considerably diminished in british ability to pay even for its own purchases. And .... yes the french had #mountains# of gold in their chests ... but only did not want to ship it at all for paying.

There's also another effect of no USW ... 'normal' subwarfare which ate considerably in british bottoms available already well before USW surging up from September 1916 onwards (see here). And - as said - the british goverment would have problems buying/chartering other esp in the US of A (running out of collateral mobilizable in the US of A).
And with lesser and lesser ships also lesser and lesser goods (aside to have to pay for) being shipped towards the european Entente-'partners'. ... including the french and their hunger for steel ... to built i.e. tanks.

Germans don't have tanks and little prospect of getting any.

Aside from some hundred captured and repaired they had aside the BIG A7V the 'light' tanks in the pipeline for production LK I, II and III. So ... rather more than 'little prospect'.

and they are running out of airplanes and pilots.

... I'm somehow afraid you con found World War ONE with World War TWO here. Aside from the hefty airplane building program (otherwise the 5000 airplane motors to transfer postwar to the allies as well as the destruction of said unused plane are difficult to explain) until the end of the war the germans had as much or as less a pilots problem as the allies (remember ? ITTL no US dough boys to fly french planes ;-) ).

but with a Spartacus Movement on their hands

Though the Spartakus at that time existed as a small propaganda group within the USPD only it was far from a "movement".
And with the ITTL rather better running 'Kaiserschlacht' aka german offense in spring or ITTL rather summer (no US of A entry so far => more time for getting more troops out of the east) there won't be the desperate 'last fleet action' attempt that lead to the november revolution in Germany.
And the moves to a democratisation esp. of Prussia came more, more often and in ever faster frequence.

and no food harvest,

Quite some exaggeration. There was a food harvest and the grain deliveries already comming IOTL out of Ukraine were considerable. Therefore the harvest to be expected for 1918 ITTL - in Germany, Ober-Ost, Austria-Hungary as well as the Ukraine) would be rather positivly received.


No, IMHO there are quite some probable chances for the CP to make some considerable gains in 1918/1919 and rather likely the Entente mostly Britain will - behind curtains - ask if there won't be a possibilitzy for talks which due to near complete exhaustion on all sides might commence in ... midth to late 1919.

 

[NoMommsen]

Sry, no need for handwaving, only better knowledge ...

Sorry but this sort of handwaving is extremely irritating. If you can't come up with a credible reason for Germany to do this why propose it in the first place? USW was Germany's last throw of the dice to try and get the Entente to make peace on terms reasonably favourable to Germany(bearing in mind they couldn't predict the Russian collapse) and they knew the potential consequences and did it anyway, why are they going to change their minds and do nothing while their population suffers increasing hunger that is destabilizing the country?

... and you seem not to know how narrow the decision in January 1917 in Berlin actually was due to internal power struggles . It wouldn't need much more than one of Kaiser Bill's 'moods' to at least postpone a decision on that item for another 3 months or so (and no, the silent dictatorship was NOT able to overcome a Kaisers votum).
... as happened in early 1916 ending in Tirpitz being sacked.

 

[Bomster]

... and you seem not to know how narrow the decision in January 1917 in Berlin actually was due to internal power struggles . It wouldn't need much more than one of Kaiser Bill's 'moods' to at least postpone a decision on that item for another 3 months or so (and no, the silent dictatorship was NOT able to overcome a Kaisers votum).
... as happened in early 1916 ending in Tirpitz being sacked.

So let's say it is postponed for a few more months. The US doesn't enter the war. The Revolution comes to Russia on schedule. France begins experiencing mutinies. What do you think the Germans will do in this situation.

 

[Riain]

@Riain thoughts?

I think that USW has to be replaced by something, I'd suggest a repeat of the 'sharpened' campaign rules as a compromise between cruiser rules and USW.

The Sharpened rules are "Attacks could be made without warning on: (1) all enemy ships inside the British Isles war zone, (2) all defensively-armed enemy ships outside the war zone which would be treated as warships, (3) troop transports sailing between Le Havre and Dunkirk. All passengers ships whether armed or unarmed, inside or outside the war zone, could not be attacked by a submerged U-boat"

In contrast USW rules were "All waters around British Isles including the English Channel declared a War Zone where all merchant ships could be destroyed without ensuring the safety of passengers and crew; neutral ships would be at risk from attack."

Sharpened rules give a military solution to the problems Germany was facing but don't necessarily lead to the US DoW.

 

[Garrison]

Sry, no need for handwaving, only better knowledge ...

... and you seem not to know how narrow the decision in January 1917 in Berlin actually was due to internal power struggles . It wouldn't need much more than one of Kaiser Bill's 'moods' to at least postpone a decision on that item for another 3 months or so (and no, the silent dictatorship was NOT able to overcome a Kaisers votum).
... as happened in early 1916 ending in Tirpitz being sacked.

Narrow or not is irrelevant, if the decision was reached based on a rational basis then please offer a rational basis for changing it, invoking the Kaiser's 'moods' seems like more handwaving rather than 'better knowledge'. and you seem to be overstating the degree of control the Kaiser exercised by 1917. Again they have no other strategic cards to play other than USW, so what is Germany's alternate plan?
Let's also not forget that it was a highly effective strategy, in no small part owing to the British Admiralty's appalling underestimation of losses and reluctance to introduce convoys.

 

[Garrison]

So let's say it is postponed for a few more months. The US doesn't enter the war. The Revolution comes to Russia on schedule. France begins experiencing mutinies. What do you think the Germans will do in this situation.

But if the US doesn't enter the war that's going to to change the entire strategic situation for the Entente, are the French really going to pursue the same strategy as OTL knowing they don't have an unlimited supply of US troops waiting in the wings?

 

[McPherson]

... and what do you dream of at night ?

Build from what steel ?

Here.

The island of New Caledonia is rich in mineral resources, including nickel, chrome, iron, cobalt, manganese, silver, gold, lead, and copper. It is densely forested in some places, but almost all the kauri pine that was once an important export has been cut down. Nickel mining and smelting are the principal industries, and tourism and fishing are also important. There is subsistence farming, and cattle and poultry are raised, but many foodstuffs must still be imported. The entire marine special economic zone of the dependency is a natural park, with some protection, and reefs within the park are more stringently protected. New Caledonia receives substantial financial support from France.

So much for the steel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enugu
How about coal? British ally has some in Africa. And so does France... in France. (See map.)

France had to import up to 3/4 of the steel it used up for its military. Even before the germans cut them of their main source of ore to make steel. ... not to talk about the coke necessary to cook the steel which prewar came mainly from Germany.

See previous and they can import from the US ... finished steel plates.

During the war France imported even more steel from GB as well as mainly from ... the US of A. ... only that they had to buy on british accounts as Wall Street was somewhat ... reluctant giving France credit. In 1915 they managed to get a 10 million $ credit from First National Bank (?) and Morgans combined and only after much efforts thoughbut having asked for 100 millions ... 0.0 ...

And?

And , btw, the british would also run short on credit - as discussed at this board numerous times - what won't leave them broke but considerably diminished in british ability to pay even for its own purchases. And .... yes the french had #mountains# of gold in their chests ... but only did not want to ship it at all for paying.

The British were broke in 1917. Did not stop them.

There's also another effect of no USW ... 'normal' sub-warfare which ate considerably in british bottoms available already well before USW surging up from September 1916 onwards (see here). And - as said - the british goverment would have problems buying/chartering other esp in the US of A (running out of collateral mobilizable in the US of A).

Same again. They found a way.

And with lesser and lesser ships also lesser and lesser goods (aside to have to pay for) being shipped towards the european Entente-'partners'. ... including the french and their hunger for steel ... to built i.e. tanks.

The steel for 1000 FT 17s = 1 Normandie. They can break one up on the weighs if they have too, Wait! They did.

Aside from some hundred captured and repaired they had aside the BIG A7V the 'light' tanks in the pipeline for production LK I, II and III. So ... rather more than 'little prospect'.

How come these did not materialize? Wait! No engines!

... I'm somehow afraid you con found World War ONE with World War TWO here. Aside from the hefty airplane building program (otherwise the 5000 airplane motors to transfer postwar to the allies as well as the destruction of said unused plane are difficult to explain) until the end of the war the germans had as much or as less a pilots problem as the allies (remember ? ITTL no US dough boys to fly french planes ;-) ).

The Germans never had more than 700 machines assembled in the West.

Though the Spartakus at that time existed as a small propaganda group within the USPD only it was far from a "movement".

Why did the fleet mutiny again?

And with the ITTL rather better running 'Kaiserschlacht' aka german offense in spring or ITTL rather summer (no US of A entry so far => more time for getting more troops out of the east) there won't be the desperate 'last fleet action' attempt that lead to the november revolution in Germany.

Rejected. The sailors knew a death or glory ride was in the offing. They still would have mutinied.

And the moves to a democratisation esp. of Prussia came more, more often and in ever faster frequence.

That is kind of the point.

Quite some exaggeration. There was a food harvest and the grain deliveries already comming IOTL out of Ukraine were considerable. Therefore the harvest to be expected for 1918 ITTL - in Germany, Ober-Ost, Austria-Hungary as well as the Ukraine) would be rather positivly received.

The Germans were down to turnips in 1918. How do I know this? My German great grandparents emigrated post war from the Saarland after they lost the farm. I have their papers.

No, IMHO there are quite some probable chances for the CP to make some considerable gains in 1918/1919 and rather likely the Entente mostly Britain will - behind curtains - ask if there won't be a possibilitzy for talks which due to near complete exhaustion on all sides might commence in ... midth to late 1919.

They were also about to run out of another valuable war commodity referred to as INFANTRY. Ludendorff, that maniac, killed a lot of it in Operation Michael.

 

[HMS St.Lawrence]

That's it
Here we go again

 

[phx1138]

almost certainly butterflying or atleast delaying US entry into the war on the side of the Entente

No. USW had no (or almost no) influence on U.S. entry. The Zimmerman Telegram was the main cause. That, and the fact Germany had been pulling sabotage across the U.S. of one kind or another for more than a year, with the goal of distracting the U.S. & keeping her out of the war.

Sharpened rules

Would that be necessary? AIUI, Admiralty instructions told all merchantmen to report U-boats on sight. That made them de facto auxiliaries, & thus fair game even under the cruiser rules.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

No. USW had no (or almost no) influence on U.S. entry. The Zimmerman Telegram was the main cause.

Averting the resumption of USW butterflies away the Zimmermand Telegram.

The Telegram reads:

We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal of alliance on the following basis: make war together, make peace together, generous financial support and an understanding on our part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. The settlement in detail is left to you. You will inform the President of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain, and add the suggestion that he should, on his own initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and ourselves. Please call the President's attention to the fact that the ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of compelling England in a few months to make peace.
Signed, ZIMMERMANN

 

[Riain]

Would that be necessary? AIUI, Admiralty instructions told all merchantmen to report U-boats on sight. That made them de facto auxiliaries, & thus fair game even under the cruiser rules.

It appeared something had to be done, the Sharpened Rules are the compromise between cruiser rules which appeared to be insufficient and USW which even as you say appeared fair enough it also appeared to be a step too far. I'd suggest the Sharpened Rules then argue the diplomatic points o that basis and if that leads to a US DoW then go USW from that point. However I'd suggest the Sharpened Rules would delay the US DoW to an extent, maybe enough to influence events in Europe.

 

[tomo pauk]

If the US entrance can be delayed by 6 months (preferably by 12 months, let alone indefinitely), Germany has a far better 1918 since they have weaker opponents in the West. Can they prevail in 1918? Not sure that anyone has an irrefutable answer to that.

 

[McPherson]

If the US entrance can be delayed by 6 months (preferably by 12 months, let alone indefinitely), Germany has a far better 1918 since they have weaker opponents in the West. Can they prevail in 1918? Not sure that anyone has an irrefutable answer to that.

Depends on the resilience of the Poilus and the tank production. My guess is that the French can hang in there. Then the armor shows up.

 

[oofo]

This map doesn't account for the quality of the coal found in the deposits, whether or not these deposits were actively being mined, and the degree to which they were being mined. In reality, almost all of France's coal production was concentrated in the North. By 1914 the Germans had occupied almost all of it. The only area the French still held which produced a significant amount of coal was the operations at Béthune (near the western end of the deposit in Pais de Calais, which accounted for about 80% of French coal production during WWI. It was also about 5ish~ miles away from the frontline.

New Caledonia really only produced nickel, that's it. And it was pretty low quality ore.

This idea you have that tanks were seemingly crucial to victory WWI is... odd. They were very much a tactical tool during WWI, and weren't capable of making a strategic impact. The results of their use during the war shows this pretty clearly.

Airpower is more important, but it should be noted that the Germans were able to achieve and maintain local air superiority over the important areas of the front during early 1918.